Bill Clinton denounces high-capacity weapons

Former President Bill Clinton said Wednesday he hopes former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and other gun-control activists bring change to the country in the wake of the Newtown massacre, calling the proliferation of high-capacity weapons “nuts.”

Clinton made the comments a day after the two-year anniversary of the Tuscon, Ariz., mass shooting that nearly claimed the life of Giffords who this week launched a new gun-control effort.

Text Size

POLITICO LIVE: Assault weapons ban: political future?

“I grew up in this hunting culture, but this is nuts,” said the Southern-born former president, as he spoke at the International Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. The speech was recorded by the Associated Press.

“Why does anybody need a … 30-round clip for a gun?” said Clinton, who in 1994 signed the assault weapons ban into law. It lapsed a decade later.

“Why does anybody need one of those things that carries 100 bullets? The guy in Colorado had one of those,” said Clinton, referring to the movie theater massacre in Aurora, Colo., last year. “Half of all mass killings in the U.S. occurred since the assault weapons ban expired in 2005.”

“So, I hope that former Congresswoman Gabby Giffords and other people who have stepped up after the Newtown tragedy will have some impact on this,” said Clinton, in some of his most extensive public comments since the horrific Dec. 14 attack in Connecticut claimed the lives of 20 children and six adults.

President Obama has appointed a task force, led by Vice President Joe Biden, to come up with the basis for new legislation he’ll submit this year, and he’s called gun control a priority for his second term. The National Rifle Association, soon after the Newtown shootings, suggested the curative for such attacks is armed guards in every school in the country.

Clinton mentioned that concept in passing, saying it can’t be a used to deflect from passing new laws.

“Does there need to be some armed guards in some schools where there’s a high crime rate and kids themselves may take weapons to school? Absolutely,” he said. “But it is not an excuse not to deal with this issue.”

A number of other high-profile figures have discussed gun control this week, including New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who in his State of the State address earlier in the day called for tighter curbs on assault weapons in his New York.

Readers' Comments (56)

I am significantly challenged to take Billy Clinton seriously; I can never figure out if he is being deceitful or being truthful.

Same is true for his wife.

Decades back I met Billy in person at a political event. I have a photograph of the two of us together. While posing for this photograph, Billy reached behind me and patted my backside. This photograph shows him with an arm around me in an inappropriate position. Upon leaving he grins and says, "I sure hope I see you again." I did not share his hope and voted for Bush.

The U.S could take a lesson from Australia. In 1996, 35 people were killed in the worst gun massacre in Australian history. But the next decade saw the firearm homicide rate fall by 59 per cent, and the firearm suicide rate fall by 65 per cent, without a corresponding rise in non-firearm deaths. Australia’s response to the 1996 massacre was comprehensive. Admittedly, policies such as its government gun "buyback" policy could not conceivably be passed in the US. But other Australian policies, including a 28-day waiting period before purchase, and a complete ban on semi-automatic weapons could be imitated. The extent of America’s gun problems are so huge that even comparatively small improvements in our gun laws are worthwhile: a 1 per cent drop in gun fatalities would mean 300 fewer deaths a year.

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." So reads the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.

No one can convincingly argue we have a well-regulated militia, yet our Constitution claims it is necessary. Is it? As Command-in-Chief, President Obama has military authority over our unofficial militia. He could take unilateral action to organize, train and regulate our citizens under military supervision. That would be a shocking development to gun-loving survivalists and weekend warriors who spend their free time playing war games on private property and claim exceptional devotion to our Constitution. Maybe that's what our president needs to do: organize, train and regulate them. Everyone fiscally responsible realizes we have to severely slash our defense budget going forward if we are to be fiscally sound again. Perhaps spending money to have many in our military organize and train citizen militias in all fifty states makes good sense, both militarily and economically. The regulations would be decided by our military leaders, especially our Commander-in-Chief.

This might become a popular idea among many gun lovers. I believe many gun-loving Americans would be proud to serve in an official militia. It would make a patriotic heart swell with pride to feel we are somehow officially recognized and depended upon as backup defenders of our government, military and country. Many Americans , of course, would choose to turn over their guns to avoid the militia training. That’s okay too. Our Commander-in-Chief could order all American gun owners to submit to military processing and organizing and training. Such a project would help us discover most mentally unbalanced persons who should not be entrusted with weapons.

Once a gun safety package is delivered to Congress, we will see Republicans asking, "What dead children? Oh, those. I vaguely remember. Well, it's the price of freedom." But those in favor in better regulating our militia have another James Brady in Gabby Giffords, a poignant and powerful witness to the crying need to take reasonable regulating action, as demanded by our Constitution. Our citizen law enforcers will stand strong on the side of such background checks and bans on weapons that put them at a disadvantage against criminals and rebellious citizens. Cops have long wanted certain body-armor-piercing bullets and weaponry banned for sale in the United States. The political will of the people is present to get such regulating, safety-enhancing legislation passed. Do extremist NRA nuts want to argue citizens have the right to be nuclearly armed as well? Where do they draw the lines? If they draw no lines, then they are going against the constitutional demand to "well regulate" our citizens with guns. Either way, it's a losing political position they seek to advance.

I have a photograph of the two of us together. While posing for this photograph, Billy reached behind me and patted my backside. This photograph shows him with an arm around me in an inappropriate position. Upon leaving he grins and says, "I sure hope I see you again." I did not share his hope and voted for Bush.

Have you posted this photograph on your website? You should -- along with your appropriately reprimanding description you have shared. (Of course, just because the guy is a sexual dog doesn't mean what he says about gun safety is wrong.)

Ironically what the Democrats have done in the last few weeks is to markedly increase the number of Americans who have armed their households. Never before in history have so many Americans taken advantage of their 2nd Amendment rights. Everytime the Democrats open their mouths, sales absolutely skyrocket. It's a truly incredible phenomenon to behold.

The Democrat "War on Guns " will have the same outcome as the War on Poverty and the War on Drugs. The only things that the Dems and the gun haters can accomplish is to drive up the price of guns, create a balck market and ensure that only criminals will have guns. Then, of course. there is the Militia Act of 1913, also called the Dick Act (no offense to Bill Clinton) which allows all men between 18 and 45 to arm themselves as they see fit.

Decades back I met Billy in person at a political event. I have a photograph of the two of us together. While posing for this photograph, Billy reached behind me and patted my backside. This photograph shows him with an arm around me in an inappropriate position. Upon leaving he grins and says, "I sure hope I see you again." I did not share his hope and voted for Bush.

Whats "nuts" is that a pot puffin, draft dodging, serial rapist liar can become POTUS. THAT is nuts !

Isn't that something.., and the GOP wished dearly that they had someone like a Bubba that had the favorabiltiy given to him as an ex-president... You know.., I didn't hear Dubya speak at the GOP livestock convention?...

Ironically what the Democrats have done in the last few weeks is to markedly increase the number of Americans who have armed their households

What exactly have "Democrats done"? The answer of course is NOTHING! A guy armed with an assult weapon DID however enter into a school building and he did shoot (repeatedly) and kill 20, YES, that's right 20 small children (6-7 years old) - THAT DID HAPPEN! And if you don't think anything needs to be done about that then you are void of a soul. You are less than human if you can't see this as a problem and you continue to blame the Democrats because they are trying to find a way to keep this from happening again and again.

I am significantly challenged to take Billy Clinton seriously; I can never figure out if he is being deceitful or being truthful.

Same is true for his wife.

Decades back I met Billy in person at a political event. I have a photograph of the two of us together. While posing for this photograph, Billy reached behind me and patted my backside. This photograph shows him with an arm around me in an inappropriate position. Upon leaving he grins and says, "I sure hope I see you again." I did not share his hope and voted for Bush.

Okpulot Taha - Choctaw Nation

Oh.., we hear you.. But.., we're not challenged, whatsoever.., in not taking you seriously... And we can certainly figure it out..

For sure the father of the year was a good DADDY to monica. Slick needs to go back to Hope or at least keep an eye on Hillary so she doesnt become any more disoriented before her testimony. Oh yea we dont give a F.. what you think about guns.